Your search found 5 records
1 Vermeulen, S. J.; Aggarwal, Pramod; Ainslie, A.; Angelone, C.; Campbell, B. M.; Challinor, A. J.; Hansen, J. W.; Ingram, J. S. I.; Jarvis, A.; Kristjanson, P.; Lau, C.; Nelson, G. C.; Thornton, P. K.; Wollenberg, E. 2012. Options for support to agriculture and food security under climate change. Environmental Science and Policy, 15(1):136-144. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2011.09.003]
Climate change ; Risks ; Food security ; Adaptation ; Agricultural production ; Greenhouse gases ; Policy
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044598)
(0.38 MB)
Agriculture and food security are key sectors for intervention under climate change. Agricultural production is highly vulnerable even to 2C (low-end) predictions for global mean temperatures in 2100, with major implications for rural poverty and for both rural and urban food security. Agriculture also presents untapped opportunities for mitigation, given the large land area under crops and rangeland, and the additional mitigation potential of aquaculture. This paper presents a summary of current knowledge on options to support farmers, particularly smallholder farmers, in achieving food security through agriculture under climate change. Actions towards adaptation fall into two broad overlapping areas: (1) accelerated adaptation to progressive climate change over decadal time scales, for example integrated packages of technology, agronomy and policy options for farmers and food systems, and (2) better management of agricultural risks associated with increasing climate variability and extreme events, for example improved climate information services and safety nets. Maximization of agriculture’s mitigation potential will require investments in technological innovation and agricultural intensification linked to increased efficiency of inputs, and creation of incentives and monitoring systems that are inclusive of smallholder farmers. Food systems faced with climate change need urgent, broad-based action in spite of uncertainties.
2 Vermeulen, S. J.; Aggarwal, Pramod; Ainslie, A.; Angelone, C.; Campbell, B. M.; Challinor, A. J.; Hansen, J. W.; Ingram, J. S. I.; Jarvis, A.; Kristjanson, P.; Lau, C.; Nelson, G. C.; Thornton, P. K.; Wollenberg, E. 2010. Agriculture, food security and climate change: outlook for knowledge, tools and action. Background paper prepared for The Hague Conference on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change, 31 October - 5 November 2010. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR-ESSP Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). 16p.
Agriculture ; Food security ; Climate change ; Risks ; Models ; Greenhouse gases ; Policy ; Smallholders
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044643)
http://ccafs.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/pdf/ccafs_report_3-low-res_final.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H044643.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H044643.pdf
(0.37 MB) (378.60KB)
Agriculture and food security are key sectors for intervention under climate change. Agricultural production is highly vulnerable even to 2C (low-end) predictions for global mean temperatures in 2100, with major implications for rural poverty and for both rural and urban food security. Agriculture also presents untapped opportunities for mitigation, given the large land area under crops and rangeland, and the additional mitigation potential of aquaculture. This paper presents a summary of current scientific knowledge on the impacts of climate change on farming and food systems, and on the implications for adaptation and mitigation. Many of the trends and impacts are highly uncertain at a range of spatial and temporal scales; we need significant advances in predicting how climate variability and change will affect future food security. Despite these uncertainties, it is clear that the magnitude and rate of projected changes will require adaptation. Actions towards adaptation fall into two broad overlapping areas: (1) better management of agricultural risks associated with increasing climate variability and extreme events, for example improved climate information services and safety nets, and (2) accelerated adaptation to progressive climate change over decadal time scales, for example integrated packages of technology, agronomy and policy options for farmers and food systems.Maximization of agriculture’s mitigation potential will require, among others, investments in technological innovation and agricultural intensification linked to increased efficiency of inputs, and creation of incentives and monitoring systems that are inclusive of smallholder farmers. The challenges posed by climate change to agriculture and food security require a holistic and strategic approach to linking knowledge with action. Key elements of this are greater interactions between decision-makers and researchers in all sectors, greater collaboration among climate, agriculture and food security communities, and consideration of interdependencies across whole food systems and landscapes. Food systems faced with climate change need urgent action in spite of uncertainties.
3 Vermeulen, S. J.; Challinor, A. J.; Thornton, P. K.; Campbell, B. M.; Eriyagama, Nishadi; Vervoort, J; Kinyangi, J.; Jarvis, A.; Laderach, P.; Ramirez-Villegas, J.; Nicklin, K. J.; Hawkins, E.; Smith, D. R. 2013. Addressing uncertainty in adaptation planning for agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(21): 8357-8362.
Climate change ; Adaptation ; Uncertainty ; Agriculture ; Food security ; Developing countries ; Coffee ; Models ; Case studies ; Stakeholders ; Decision making ; Greenhouse gases / Sri Lanka / East Africa / Central America
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H045835)
(0.90 MB) (921.17KB)
We present a framework for prioritizing adaptation approaches at a range of timeframes. The framework is illustrated by four case studies from developing countries, each with associated characterisation of uncertainty. Two cases, on near-term adaptation planning in Sri Lanka and on stakeholder scenario exercises in East Africa, show how the relative utility of ‘capacity’ versus ‘impact’ approaches to adaptation planning differ with level of uncertainty and associated lead time. A further two cases demonstrate that it is possible to identify uncertainties that are relevant to decision-making in specific timeframes and circumstances. The case on coffee in Latin America identifies altitudinal thresholds at which incremental versus transformative adaptation pathways are robust options. The final case uses three crop-climate simulation studies to demonstrate how uncertainty can be characterised at different time horizons to discriminate where robust adaptation options are possible. We find that ‘impact’ approaches, which use predictive models, are increasingly useful over longer lead times and at higher levels of greenhouse gas emissions. We also find that extreme events are important in determining predictability across a broad range of timescales. The results demonstrate the potential for robust knowledge and actions in the face of uncertainty.
4 Ortiz, R.; Jarvis, A.; Fox, P.; Aggarwal, Pramod; Campbell, B. M.. 2014. Plant genetic engineering, climate change and food security. 27p. (CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) Working Paper 72)
Plant genetics ; Climate change ; Adaptation ; Food security ; Emission reduction ; Agriculture ; Drought ; Salinity ; Heat ; Public health ; Human nutrition ; Crops ; Environmental effects ; Farming systems ; Living standards
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H046809)
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/41934/CCAFS%20WP%2072.pdf?sequence=1
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H046809.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H046809.pdf
(1.58 MB) (1.58 MB)
This paper explores whether crop genetic engineering can contribute to addressing food security, as well as enhancing human nutrition and farming under a changing climate. The review is based on peer-refereed literature, using results to determine the potential of this gene technology. It also provides a brief summary of issues surrounding this genetic enhancement approach to plant breeding, and the impacts on farming, livelihoods, and the environment achieved so far. The genetic engineering pipeline looks promising, particularly for adapting more nutritious, input-efficient crops in the development of the world’s farming systems.
5 Dinesh, D.; Hegger, D.; Vervoort, J.; Campbell, B. M.; Driessen, P. P. J. 2021. Learning from failure at the science-policy interface for climate action in agriculture. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 26(1):2. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-021-09940-x]
Research programmes ; CGIAR ; Climate change ; Agriculture ; Adaptation ; Mitigation ; Policies ; Decision making ; Food security ; Funding ; Learning ; Institutions ; Strategies ; Innovation ; Uncertainty ; Political aspects
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050281)
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11027-021-09940-x.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050281.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050281.pdf
(0.61 MB) (629 KB)
Science–policy engagement efforts to accelerate climate action in agricultural systems are key to enable the sector to contribute to climate and food security goals. However, lessons to improve science–policy engagement efforts in this context mostly come from successful efforts and are limited in terms of empirical scope. Moreover, lessons have not been generated systematically from failed science–policy engagement efforts. Such analysis using lessons from failure management can improve or even transform the efficacy of efforts. To address this knowledge gap, we examined challenges and failures faced in science–policy engagement efforts of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). We developed an explanatory framework inspired by Cash et al.’s criteria for successful knowledge systems for sustainable development: credibility, salience, and legitimacy, complemented with insights from the wider literature. Using this framework in a survey, we identified factors which explain failure. To effectively manage these factors, we propose a novel approach for researchers working at the science–policy interface to fail intelligently, which involves planning for failure, minimizing risks, effective design, making failures visible, and learning from failures. This approach needs to be complemented by actions at the knowledge system level to create an enabling environment for science–policy interfaces.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
